Raise Deerfoot speed?

[2EFNFAST]

How would one go about getting a petition or whatnot to raise the speed on Deerfoot to 120? Or would it be a waste of time? :confused:

[7thgenvic]

I DO NOT think they would raise it. especially the fact that they wanted to lower it because of all the accidents. Deerfoot and Calgary drivers cannot handle 120

[colinxx235]

120 is over high way... so probably impossible, 110 might be more realistic in some areas

[Grogador]

Why? Either you're stuck going 10 with everyone else, or you fly along at 100+ or whatever you feel like. There's enough idiots and deaths on the Deerfoot 500, maybe you should petition them not to lower it to 80...

[jiggawhat]

too many stupid calgarians to handle that. you are asking too much

[pepschnops]

For what reason? With police cracking down on driving infractions especially speeding why would they want to raise a speed limit?

[dino_martini]

People already go 120+ on Deerfoot. lol

[Eleanor]

^ Bingo, they raise it to 120, and everyone starts doing 140.

They'll never raise the speed limit, don't waste your time.

[Xtrema]

100 is reasonable given the traffic on it now.

10 years ago, 120 would be useful.

[Kloubek]

Agreed Eleanor.

It is already touted as the most dangerous road in Calgary - raising the speed would make it worse. I can't believe the OP cannot see that. I know what you mean though man - sometimes people go pretty slow for my liking too - but we don't want more accidents on there do we?

Plus, the mentality of making it quicker than most main highways between major cities? lol... 110 max on my way to Kamloops. 130 max on Deerfoot. Duh.

[jiggawhat]

yeah what these two kids said ^^

[RY213]

Instead of raising the limit they should make it so it is illegal to drive under 95. Its so annoying when the road is clear,light traffic and there is some retard going 80...

[2EFNFAST]

Yea, I suppose it's just wishful thinking.

However, from my vantage point it would make sense - most people are doing 115-120 already, and those who are doing 100-105 are really clogging things up. If they'd just speed the frick up things would flow smoother in non-rush-hour situations.

I was just thinking about to the ??80s?? when they had that plebicite to add fluoride to the water.

[mark4091]

the problem is the guys going 80 in formation in all three lanes.

[Alterac]

Get a couple buddies and go 100 in formation.. for all day.. See if the cops show up.

[SR240SX]

Fuck that idea, Deerfoot is enough of a shit show as it is.

[ercchry]

the problem is all the nosy fools that slow down to 50 for anything out of the ordinary going on on the side of the road... and also that stupid rule that you have to slow down to 60km/h when passing an emergency vehicle with its lights on....

and better rule would be if you crash or are getting pulled over and it is possible to drive your vehicle then drive clear off the damn highway and onto a side road

[sabad66]

If they did do it, they'd have to make some of the merge lanes longer too for cars like my old 95hp Civic lol

[prae]

Originally posted by ercchry
that stupid rule that you have to slow down to 60km/h when passing an emergency vehicle with its lights on....


Ever met the family of a policeman or EMT killed by passing traffic?

The rule is not stupid.

[Jay911]

Originally posted by ercchry
also that stupid rule that you have to slow down to 60km/h when passing an emergency vehicle with its lights on....

That 'stupid rule' saves the lives of emergency responders every time they go out. Prior to it being in place, there have been instances of firefighters being permanently disabled and cops being outright killed by drivers going ridiculous speeds past them (actually, into them, because 99% of people on the road refuse to pay attention to the road).

Go ahead and stand in the inside lane of Deerfoot trying to cut someone out of a car with traffic still going 100-125 past you in the immediately adjacent lane and then tell me if slowing people down is stupid.

[ercchry]

ok i agree that it is good to stay clear of emergency workers on the highways and i respect the jobs that they have... BUT i do think it can be done in a different manor on deerfoot... since the road is almost always 3 lanes for the majority of it.. why would it not be possible for everyone to just keep the lane closest to the emergency crew clear and drive regular speed in the other 2?

[SR240SX]

3 lanes isnt enough for deerfoot...and having 2 you would be pretty lucky to go 100km/ph...I would rather have to slow down for a few seconds while passing an accident and keep going the normal speed afterwards then getting stuck in 2 lanes of traffic on deerfoot...

:banghead:

[ercchry]

if traffic is flowing well moving over a lane for 2 seconds with out slowing will keep the road flowing... if everyone goes from 100-60-100 it fucks the flow right up.. there is a video somewhere of a traffic simulation where everyone starts at the same speed then after a while people end up at different rats of speed resulting in braking and then it becomes a mess... just like deerfoot today around 5:30.... i passed about 4 or 5 different areas with flashing lights.... took over an hour from 16th ave to anderson

[badatusrnames]

Good luck getting it changed, even if you have valid and sensible reasons for proposing to do so. The bleeding hearts will come out and whine and cry and ask you to think about the children, the old and the environment and equate raising the limit with committing murder.

Then they will succeed in getting the limit slowed to 60.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

The problem with raising the speed to 120 is that it gives poor drivers even less time to react if traffic suddenly stops in front of them.

There will always be traffic problems as long as reaction driving is around. After work people are too tired to think. They turn off their brains, hop in their car, brake when the person in front brakes, accelerate when the person... If each person takes 1 second to react, then it gets progressively worse.

To play devil's advocate, maybe increasing the speed limit is the only way to fix traffic problems. All the scared/reactionary drivers would stop driving on Deerfoot or get into accidents and then all that would be left are people that pay attention and obey safe driving practices.

When I picked up my car in Virginia, I drove back through St. Louis. On the mid city highway (much like deerfoot with tighter lanes) during rish hour, the traffic moves at 120-130 bumper to bumper (not literally, fairly safe driving distance). You cannot drive there if you don't pay attention, and as scary as it is at first, you get used to it and appreciate the efficiency. There would be a lot of deaths and property damage at first if they implemented this, but the extreme measures taken would be the only way to solve the problem permanently.

[510-Trevor]

Originally posted by ercchry
ok i agree that it is good to stay clear of emergency workers on the highways and i respect the jobs that they have... BUT i do think it can be done in a different manor on deerfoot... since the road is almost always 3 lanes for the majority of it.. why would it not be possible for everyone to just keep the lane closest to the emergency crew clear and drive regular speed in the other 2?
That is the rule. If the emeregency vehicle is on the shoulder, only the first lane is 60kph. If its in the first lane, then the 2'nd lane is 60kph .....

[ercchry]

Originally posted by 510-Trevor

That is the rule. If the emeregency vehicle is on the shoulder, only the first lane is 60kph. If its in the first lane, then the 2'nd lane is 60kph .....

really? i always thought it was everyone? seems like a lot of people do not understand the rule fully since it seems like every time it happens either no one slows or everyone does

[2EFNFAST]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
There would be a lot of deaths and property damage at first if they implemented this, but the extreme measures taken would be the only way to solve the problem permanently.

That's a good concluding statement on a proposal :rofl:

[SetoJai]

the speed on deerfoot should not change at all, as you see some will only drive 100 kph while others will weave in and out of the traffic at 120+ kph like racers. i have seen some people even go as slow as 80 as they are scared shitless of the other 120+ kph drivers. driving on deerfoot requires a lot of focus and concentration for some drivers to be driving fast...

[shin0bi]

Pshht.... Deerfoot's fine. Any faster and its just an excuse for people to get even more reckless...

I want to see them raise the speed limit of John Laurie.

Is there any good reason that it should be 70? Its nothing more than a money pit for the five-o... Its easy to speed due to all the peaks and valleys, and the po-lice take full advantage of this. Every time I drive on it, I either see someone pulled over, or a cop with a radar gun.

[HACHIROKU_4AG]

the speed limit increase for deerfoot is already being researched. has been for a couple years now. they compare the flow to other metro's innercity highway networks. most likely in the near future nothing will change, but eventually something will have to change. problem lies in all the entrance and exit ways on deerfoot. on the news, they were saying that in order to raise the limit soon, they would have to close over half of the entrance and exit ramps due to congestion.

[Zigo]

Guys, lets just make deerfoot bicycles only The speed limit could be like 10!

- Police can still give tickets
- No more deaths
- Cures Obesity

[Redlyne_mr2]

That road would be suicide with a speed increase. It's not bad if its just cars but with semis, rv, etc it would be a nightmare.

[revelations]

Originally posted by ercchry


really? i always thought it was everyone? seems like a lot of people do not understand the rule fully since it seems like every time it happens either no one slows or everyone does

Ignorance effect for the former, gawker effect for the latter.

[HACHIROKU_4AG]

they commented on the revision (if any) to be put in place after the ring road is completed. this would take the semi-trailer trucks mostly out of the picture.

i always think to myself, why does the 401 in toronto, and the i-whatever in so many states etc work so well at high speed, and this measly Deerfoot trail is such a pain in the $%#!!!

re-educating/re-examination of drivers would be a better fix.

[TorqueDog]

On the Deerfoot, I drive 120-130 KM/H. I practice lane courtesy, and don't weave about like a dickwad. Seems to work pretty well for me.

As far as John Laurie Blvd is concerned, fuckin' rights it should be higher than 70 KM/H. 80-90 KM/H makes way more friggin' sense. Just put in warning lights that say "Prepare to Stop" before the the light-controlled intersections.

[FiveFreshFish]

Originally posted by shin0bi
I want to see them raise the speed limit of John Laurie.

Is there any good reason that it should be 70? Its nothing more than a money pit for the five-o... Its easy to speed due to all the peaks and valleys, and the po-lice take full advantage of this. Every time I drive on it, I either see someone pulled over, or a cop with a radar gun.

It's those T-intersections at 19 St, Charleswood and Brisebois that prevent anything higher than 70. Then it drops to 60 west of Sarcee.

[sunsam]

to be honest i think we should just make deerfoot wider , rather then increase speed limit .. we dont have the proper ramps for acceleration to reach 120 before merging in to traffic going 120.. that would be a shit show if someone got Hit ..

[TorqueDog]

Then get rid of 'em. Make John Laurie Blvd a limited access expressway for all I care. Calgary doesn't have a northern east-west corridor (since Stoney Trail N is still in progress, and it is still very far north to be considered wholly useful).

As far as widening Deerfoot goes, they're doing that in a lot of places, but they are really screwed for room in a lot of spots. The ramps are fine though, I was able to accelerate to 120 KM/H to merge in my JEEP fer chrissakes; pretty sure if that aerodynamic brick can do it, anything can.

[FiveFreshFish]

Originally posted by TorqueDog
Then get rid of 'em. Make John Laurie Blvd a limited access expressway for all I care. Calgary doesn't have a northern east-west corridor (since Stoney Trail N is still in progress, and it is still very far north to be considered wholly useful).

They got rid of one of them many years ago. Remember 40th Ave near Holland St?

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=40+Ave+%26+Holland+St+NW,+calgary,+ab&sll=51.091704,-114.087911&sspn=0.0119,0.019033&ie=UTF8&ll=51.090801,-114.089541&spn=0.0119,0.019033&z=16&g=40+Ave+%26+Holland+St+NW,+calgary,+ab&iwloc=addr

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by sunsam
to be honest i think we should just make deerfoot wider , rather then increase speed limit .. we dont have the proper ramps for acceleration to reach 120 before merging in to traffic going 120.. that would be a shit show if someone got Hit ..

If my old firefly (52hp, maybe 52.3 with the exhaust) could do it, anything can. Just need to pin it right away and keep the pedal mashed.

Making Deerfoot wider is an improper temporary fix for a way bigger problem (driver education).

[FiveFreshFish]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz

Making Deerfoot wider is an improper temporary fix for a way bigger problem (driver education).

On the contrary, Deerfoot is carrying way more cars than it was originally designed for. Driver education won't help increase throughput and relieve congestion. An extra lane will.

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by FiveFreshFish


On the contrary, Deerfoot is carrying way more cars than it was originally designed for. Driver education won't help increase throughput and relieve congestion. An extra lane will.

Sure it'll help for a little while. But those morons will still clog that extra lane and do the exact same stupid shit as before just with more room to do it. Instead of 3 morons driving 90 side by side, it'll be 4...

[djayz]

Making deerfoot wider is the fix, but it also requires consistency.

You can't make it 5 lanes wide in some parts then have it go down to 2 lanes then back to 4 it just won't work.

3-4 Lanes the entire length and things would flow much smoother.

All major cities with inner city highways have lane consistency, Calgary seems to be the only one with lanes increasing and decreasing which is a huge cause of traffic jams, accidents, and over all slow flow of traffic.

Even with 3 lanes going the entire distance it would make a HUGE difference 2 right lanes for slow moving vehicles and the left most lane for passing and a sign every couple kilometers reminding people to keep to the right.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by FiveFreshFish


They got rid of one of them many years ago. Remember 40th Ave near Holland St?

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=40+Ave+%26+Holland+St+NW,+calgary,+ab&sll=51.091704,-114.087911&sspn=0.0119,0.019033&ie=UTF8&ll=51.090801,-114.089541&spn=0.0119,0.019033&z=16&g=40+Ave+%26+Holland+St+NW,+calgary,+ab&iwloc=addr I didn't live here back then, but they need to do that to the rest of the T-intersections. Especially where Charleswood is concerned; I mean, if you're exiting John Laurie Blvd to Charleswood, you're driving through a playground zone. If I could avoid attaching a residential street with a playground zone to an expressway, I certainly would.

[FiveFreshFish]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz


Sure it'll help for a little while. But those morons will still clog that extra lane and do the exact same stupid shit as before just with more room to do it. Instead of 3 morons driving 90 side by side, it'll be 4...

I don't get your argument. Three lanes going at 90 km/h vs. four lanes at 90 km/h. Throughput increases by one third. How does that not help? In this very situation, you won't reach your destination any faster, but one third more cars will complete the journey, without requiring an increase in anyone's skills.

As for driver education, good luck with that. How difficult would it be to increase the motoring public's IQ by a fraction of a percent? We've been reminded about seat belts, drinking & driving, distractions and road rage, yet this shit still happens.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by FiveFreshFish
As for driver education, good luck with that. How difficult would it be to increase the motoring public's IQ by a fraction of a percent? We've been reminded about seat belts, drinking & driving, distractions and road rage, yet this shit still happens. Road rage occurs as a result of idiotic motorists; if we could cut down on the number of mindless numbskulls on the highway, I'm sure we could reduce the occurrances of road rage substantially. :D

[revelations]

Originally posted by HACHIROKU_4AG
\i always think to myself, why does the 401 in toronto, and the i-whatever in so many states etc work so well at high speed, and this measly Deerfoot trail is such a pain in the $%#!!!

Ever been on the 401 at rush hour? 16 lanes of car-commuter parking lot

[ercchry]

Originally posted by revelations


Ever been on the 401 at rush hour? 16 lanes of car-commuter parking lot

yes i have and it really is not as bad as it is here... as i was pulling onto the road i thought it would be due to the sheer volume of cars but it moves damn well!

[HACHIROKU_4AG]

i've been on the 401 plenty. thats not the concern. it's the DVP aka Don Valley Parking lot. that road reminds me of deerfoot everytime i'm there.

[Stealth22]

The 401 actually isn't all that bad...sure, its a parking lot in rush hour, but it moves better than Deerfoot in rush hour!

The DVP is more like Deerfoot...

But back on topic...

Yes, and no...if we raise the limit to 120, everybody will do 140+...the problem with Deerfoot is we have divided lanes..

Right lane: 80-90
Middle: 100
Left: 140+

Those who want to do 110, or even 120, have to move continuously between the middle and left lanes.

I'd rather see a minimum 95 law put in, with cops enforcing it, and cracking down on those who go 130+

[hampstor]

Originally posted by Stealth22
The 401 actually isn't all that bad...sure, its a parking lot in rush hour, but it moves better than Deerfoot in rush hour!

The DVP is more like Deerfoot...

But back on topic...

Yes, and no...if we raise the limit to 120, everybody will do 140+...the problem with Deerfoot is we have divided lanes..

Right lane: 80-90
Middle: 100
Left: 140+

Those who want to do 110, or even 120, have to move continuously between the middle and left lanes.

I'd rather see a minimum 95 law put in, with cops enforcing it, and cracking down on those who go 130+

yes, lets make deerfoot more complicated. People can't even notice the signs that say "80kph' for the construction zones on deerfoot, you expect them to figure out that ? The left lane is the passing lane, not the speeding lane.

Raising the speed limit will do nothing to help congestion during peak hours, and will only serve to eliminate traffic tickets for those who currently get them on deerfoot.

[TorqueDog]

Funnily enough, I've never gotten a ticket on Deerfoot.

Only on goddamn John Laurie Blvd, and 14th St near the 9th Ave underpass. :banghead:

The big problem with Deerfoot is LANE COURTESY. That's the root of the problem. You have these self-righteous douchebags who drive in the left lane doing 90 KM/H who don't move over pissing everybody off. I'd also like to see commercial vehicles required to stay in the right-most lanes as well. There is no acceptable reason for a semi to be in the passing lane.

[a social dsease]

I don't think raising the speed limit would do much to help. 90% of the time in rush hour you aren't even coming close to 100km/hr anyways. Also, there are a ton of idiots who already have huge problems merging at 100. How many times have you been driving Deerfoot NB between Peigan and 17th, and some idiot starts trying to get in right at the very beginning of the massive acceleration lane when they are still only going 80?
I don't think Deerfoot is too bad in non rush hour scenarios, usually moves pretty fast, occasional idiots going slow in the fast lane but that happens everywhere in Calgary. And the only thing that will improve rush hour conditions is more lanes. Hopefully the ring road will take some traffic off Deerfoot.

[Eleanor]

Originally posted by djayz
3-4 Lanes the entire length and things would flow much smoother.
Bingo, keep it three lanes the whole way with the fourth lane for free flow merging/exiting.

It's like EB Glenmore from Crowchild to 14th St. Within a few blocks it goes 3 -> 2 -> 4 -> 2. Who the fuck thought that one up?!?!?!?!? :banghead:

[djayz]

Originally posted by Eleanor

Bingo, keep it three lanes the whole way with the fourth lane for free flow merging/exiting.

It's like EB Glenmore from Crowchild to 14th St. Within a few blocks it goes 3 -> 2 -> 4 -> 2. Who the fuck thought that one up?!?!?!?!? :banghead:

And like memorial heading westbound near the zoo. I think about 6 months back they decided to add a 4th lane only to have it cut off after about 500 meters :banghead:

Honestly I think 3 lanes would be great on all of our major roads. 2 isn't enough, and 4 lanes just isn't possible with the way this city is planned (too many things too close to the roads).

3 Lanes the entire length on all major roads and traffic problems drastically reduced. I honestly can't wait for that 3rd lane on 16th avenue which is seeming to take longer than normal...

[SilverRex]

what they need is another lane

[Jim43]

Great idea. Bring it up to 120 and keep it that way. All police activity should be kept off Deerfoot. We citizens have it under control, thank you very much.

[kokanee27]

Originally posted by Eleanor

Bingo, keep it three lanes the whole way with the fourth lane for free flow merging/exiting.

It's like EB Glenmore from Crowchild to 14th St. Within a few blocks it goes 3 -> 2 -> 4 -> 2. Who the fuck thought that one up?!?!?!?!? :banghead:

i see your glenmore, and raise you NB crowchild right where bow trail starts
3 lanes > 2 lanes > back to 3 lanes on the bridge >2 lanes > 3 lanes > then 2 lanes by 16th ave then > 3 lanes

whoever said above that calgary has a serious 'lane consistency' problem nailed it on the head,
between crowchild, glenmore and deerfoot, three of the biggest roadways in the city, not one can keep the lanes consistent, causing massive traffic headaches

[mrcoolawesome]

I don't think that is necessary because most people drive 120km right now anyway so if they raised it people would drive 130km/140km, and so on, so I think it's better off at what it is right now.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by mrcoolawesome
I don't think that is necessary because most people drive 120km right now anyway so if they raised it people would drive 130km/140km, and so on, so I think it's better off at what it is right now. Not true. The majority of drivers will not go faster than what they feel is comfortable and safe regardless of the speed limit.

For example, an 18-month study following an increase in the speed limit along the New York Thruway from 55 to 65 mph, determined that the average speed of traffic, 68 mph, remained the same. Even a national study conducted by Federal Highway Administration also concluded that raising or lowering the speed limit had practically no effect on actual travel speeds.

[RY213]

Adding a third lane on Deerfoot over the Glenmore Tr overpass would improve traffic flow drastically. Then again, I wont be able to cruise down the right lane to where it ends and then cut in and save 15 min every morning :dunno:

[ercchry]

Originally posted by RY213
... then cut in and save 15 min every morning :dunno:

and it is assholes like you that ruin the flow of traffic for everyone else, thank you for ADDING 15min to my drive every morning :thumbsup:

as for deerfoot... if they straightened up the calf rope bridge, fixed the exit for memorial so it is farther from the merge from 17th, gave 3 lanes at the anderson and glenmore bridges, and made the exit at glenmore normal as well it would really help...

oh and also where it branches off southbound at anderson... need 3 lanes there too.

[prae]

Originally posted by RY213
Adding a third lane on Deerfoot over the Glenmore Tr overpass would improve traffic flow drastically. Then again, I wont be able to cruise down the right lane to where it ends and then cut in and save 15 min every morning :dunno:


I hope you die in a fire, fuckwad

[bobby_lu]

Originally posted by prae


Ever met the family of a policeman or EMT killed by passing traffic?

The rule is not stupid.

Im sure nothing will happen to them being run over at 60km/h , not to mention the unsafeness of slamming on the brakes to get down to the proper speed.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by RY213
Then again, I wont be able to cruise down the right lane to where it ends and then cut in and save 15 min every morning :dunno: I hope you get AIDS. :thumbsdow

[jwslam]

deerfoot sucks
but i'm glad i live extremely east of NW (huntington) so i don't have to suffer crowchild


Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
The problem with raising the speed to 120 is that it gives poor drivers even less time to react if traffic suddenly stops in front of them.

that's bullshit. if you can't handle it get off the highway unless you're leaving the city and you don't have a choice


Originally posted by shin0bi
I want to see them raise the speed limit of John Laurie.

+1
should be at least 80
and between mcknight and shag should be like 100
anybody else go from like charleswood onto john laurie only to have some fucker yield instead of merge?!!?!


Originally posted by RY213
Instead of raising the limit they should make it so it is illegal to drive under 95. Its so annoying when the road is clear,light traffic and there is some retard going 80...
that's smart but impractical.
but they SHOULD make it illegal to drive less than 100 in the left lane.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by jwslam
anybody else go from like charleswood onto john laurie only to have some fucker yield instead of merge?!!?!Only all of them. :banghead:

[2EFNFAST]

Originally posted by TorqueDog
Not true. The majority of drivers will not go faster than what they feel is comfortable and safe regardless of the speed limit.

For example, an 18-month study following an increase in the speed limit along the New York Thruway from 55 to 65 mph, determined that the average speed of traffic, 68 mph, remained the same. Even a national study conducted by Federal Highway Administration also concluded that raising or lowering the speed limit had practically no effect on actual travel speeds.

When I read your post I disagreed with that, but then I got to thinking. On deerfoot i typically average 115-120.

When I leave the city, when the limit is 110 I typically average 115-120....I don't go 130-140 unless it's for a short blast in 3rd ....... maybe there really is logic to that argument.

[Pollywog]

Half of your arguments are absolutly moronic. How about instead of feeding the "speed-demon in you", let's all try driving the same speed. Contrary to popular observations, its the inconsistancy of speed among drivers that causes the most lapse in time getting from one destination to the next.

And all you asshats who think blowing by me at 130 is being safer, try abiding by the rules that were implemented based on traffic flow, volume and safety. It could quite possibly get you to work faster than driving like a moron.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by 2EFNFAST
When I read your post I disagreed with that, but then I got to thinking. On deerfoot i typically average 115-120.

When I leave the city, when the limit is 110 I typically average 115-120....I don't go 130-140 unless it's for a short blast in 3rd ....... maybe there really is logic to that argument. Of course. Think about it; the Autobahn is delimited in some areas... that doesn't mean that every car that drives on the Autobahn is stuck at its speed limiter for the whole delimited stretch.

Of course you'll have some idiot who would actually try to hit 180 KM/H on Elbow Drive if there was a sign that said he was allowed to, but most people would go as fast as they felt they could safely.

Same with Deerfoot Trail; like I said, I usually am going anywhere between 120 and 130 KM/H; if they increased the speed limit on Deerfoot Trail from 100 KM/H to 110 KM/H, or even to 120 KM/H, I still wouldn't travel any faster than I already do.

85th percentile speeds are what we need. Let the engineers set the speed limits, not politicians.

Pollywog: You make a good point; if only you didn't come across as a raging twat when doing so.

Yes, variance in speed is ultimately what causes problems. Practicing lane courtesy alleviates these problems by trying to keep drivers moving similar speeds in the appropriate lanes. If I am passing someone, I move into the left lane, pass them, and move back over. However, there's always a couple morons or commercial drivers who hang out in the passing lane doing whatever they feel like.

[Pollywog]

Originally posted by TorqueDog

Pollywog: You make a good point; if only you didn't come across as a raging twat when doing so.



I lost my driverside mirror and quarter panel of my Infiniti on deerfoot a couple of years ago, changing lanes. I checked my mirrors, noone in the left hand lane whatsoever - until someone from the far right lane had to swerve into the far left to continue going his 130+kph race to nowhere. Due to witnesses sticking around, I didnt have to pay a dime. I was going the speedlimit and shoulder checked for christ sake! (As I do almost everywhere unless on endless stretches of highway between cities)

I sound like a raging twat, because I get enraged by some of your excuses for driving so fast to go nowhere. Had any of you some brains, you'd realize that it is due to the general public and your general ignorance when it comes to road handling and basic logic that is why government has yielded these speed limits that most feel are far too low.

This is not directly in response to TorqueDog

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by Pollywog
I lost my driverside mirror and quarter panel of my G35 on deerfoot a couple of years ago, changing lanes. I checked my mirrors, noone in the left hand lane - until someone from the far right lane had to swerve into the far left to continue going his 130+kph race to nowhere. Due to witnesses sticking around, I didnt have to pay a dime. I was going the speedlimit and shoulder checked for christ sake! (As I do almost everywhere unless on endless stretches of highway between cities)

I sound like a raging twat, because I get enraged by some of your excuses for driving so fast to go nowhere. Had any of you some brains, you'd realize that due to the general public and your general ignorance when it comes to road handling and knowledge yields us these speed limits that most feel are far too low.

This is not directly in response to TorqueDog That's a pretty extreme example though. Swerving from the right-most lane to the left-most lane is unsafe no matter what speed you're traveling, speed limit or otherwise.

So while I understand your frustration, your example is not really relevant to what we're discussing here.

[Jay911]

Originally posted by bobby_lu


Im sure nothing will happen to them being run over at 60km/h , not to mention the unsafeness of slamming on the brakes to get down to the proper speed.

The point isn't to lessen the force of the blow when you hit someone at 60kph versus 110kph. The point is you should be able at 60kph to pay enough attention to react properly and avoid any collision.

Then again, if you're having to "slam on the brakes" to go from 110kph (max) to 60kph in the distance between when you first see an emergency vehicle to the point where you get to them, evidently you need a lot of work in either your reaction time or your attention to the road and its goings-on, period.

[theken]

if people would only understand that it is following distance not speed that causes more problems then anything, chain reaction braking makes one asshole that is following close brake hard when the person in front of him slows down a touch, then the asshat following the asshole brakes harder, then so forth till everybody behind him stops, then everybody gets pissed off, if everybody gave 4 seconds following distance, there would be a constant speed kept on deerfoot even during rush hour.
unless of course there is an accident

[RY213]

LOL at the "hate" towards my comments. I actually have a good system, once I am into the next lane I always let someone else in front of me. This reduces the amount of people having to force their way in and actually improves the flow of traffic. Its the people that refuse to let others merge in ahead of them that fuck up the flow. I am actually a very courteous driver in the morning, I always slow down to let trucks in the lane in front of me, always wave at other motorists when needed etc...

[extm88]

ide rather just see a cop clock people in the fast lane and if you are doing any speed under the limit you get ticketed. I see it all the time, some asshole does 90 in the fastlane causing everyone behind to california lane change 3 over and come back. Thats how accidents happen.

[HiTempguy1]

I actually have a good system, once I am into the next lane I always let someone else in front of me.

Which just promotes doing what you do. Which in the end causes back ups. If nobody did that, there wouldn't be a need to slow down and let people merge to begin with. :guns:

[jwslam]

exactly. ie
my mom only drives in the right lane at like 85
getting near a merge she'll hit the brakes to let like 5 cars in

[RY213]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Which just promotes doing what you do. Which in the end causes back ups. If nobody did that, there wouldn't be a need to slow down and let people merge to begin with. :guns:

No, you are wrong. The cars in that lane have to move over sooner or later, it doesnt make a difference if its closer to Heritage Meadows or right at Glenmore it will cause a backup no matter what. The best thing to so is for cars in both lanes to merge properly alternating cars and this will smooth the flow of traffic...

[Ntense_SpecV]

Originally posted by RY213


No, you are wrong. The cars in that lane have to move over sooner or later, it doesnt make a difference if its closer to Heritage Meadows or right at Glenmore it will cause a backup no matter what. The best thing to so is for cars in both lanes to merge properly alternating cars and this will smooth the flow of traffic...

Sure would if people actually speed up to 100 when trying to merge - there's nothing more aggravating when you are behind someone who's trying to merge at 60-70 and you should be merging in at 90+.

[szw]

I agree with RY213.

I don't understand why people merge into lanes way before the lane ends. If EVERYBODY went to the front and zippered in the flow of traffic would be a LOT smoother. I also don't get why people would get so mad at it. Its not like someone is driving over the curb or on the shoulder to get past everyone. They are driving...IN A LANE.

Does anybody see this kind of driving mentality outside of Calgary?

[Idratherbsidewayz]

Originally posted by szw
I agree with RY213.

I don't understand why people merge into lanes way before the lane ends. If EVERYBODY went to the front and zippered in the flow of traffic would be a LOT smoother. I also don't get why people would get so mad at it. Its not like someone is driving over the curb or on the shoulder to get past everyone. They are driving...IN A LANE.

EXACTLY!

If you drive in Europe you see that no matter what, if someone is trying to merge, you let them in. Traffic flows much smoother.

People are too scared, they hate merging because nobody taught them how to do it properly. I can squeeze into the tightest spots using my technique: Go 10-20km/h faster than traffic, brake to match the speed and squeeze into any sized spot. This also gives the person you are merging in front of time to lay off the accelerator and make a little more room.

[Pollywog]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
People are too scared, they hate merging because nobody taught them how to do it properly. I can squeeze into the tightest spots using my technique: Go 10-20km/h faster than traffic, brake to match the speed and squeeze into any sized spot. This also gives the person you are merging in front of time to lay off the accelerator and make a little more room.


:werd: , I have assimilated similar technique, however I must admit its fairly sad that we have to drive as such due to people being assholes in this city and never letting people in.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by Idratherbsidewayz
If you drive in Europe you see that no matter what, if someone is trying to merge, you let them in. Traffic flows much smoother.Trying to merge, not trying to merge in doing 15 KM/H under the flow of traffic like everyone seems to, or cutting across the cross-hatched double-line area at the exit.

[pinoyhero]

Probably a waste of time, what would be the reasoning? I doubt it would offset the potential for morea nd worse accidents.

[sexualbanana]

Originally posted by 2EFNFAST


When I read your post I disagreed with that, but then I got to thinking. On deerfoot i typically average 115-120.

When I leave the city, when the limit is 110 I typically average 115-120....I don't go 130-140 unless it's for a short blast in 3rd ....... maybe there really is logic to that argument.

Driving to Edmonton, that's all you see. The speed limit may be 110, but I've seen a lot of instances where everyone is going 130+ and I'm not talking about just the right lane.

My opinion is that regardless of the speed limit change, most people will still push it between 10-15 over. Why? Because we've been trained to believe that the Police won't bother to pull you over for anything else. So in order for a speed limit change to really be effective, the Police will need to adopt a zero-tolerance policy for speeders. Which will probably result in a lot of complaints about tickets for going 5 over.

[Jay911]

Originally posted by TorqueDog
Trying to merge, not trying to merge in doing 15 KM/H under the flow of traffic like everyone seems to, or cutting across the cross-hatched double-line area at the exit.

Just this evening I had 6 or 7 vehicles in front of me from EB Glenmore to NB Deerfoot and every one of them was going 60kph on the ramp, and continued to drive 60kph once they got onto the Deerfoot itself. At least a couple gave me ugly looks as I passed them, legally, getting up to the posted speed.

[jwslam]

Originally posted by Ntense_SpecV


Sure would if people actually speed up to 100 when trying to merge - there's nothing more aggravating when you are behind someone who's trying to merge at 60-70 and you should be merging in at 90+.

+1


Originally posted by TorqueDog
Trying to merge, not trying to merge in doing 15 KM/H under the flow of traffic like everyone seems to, or cutting across the cross-hatched double-line area at the exit.

exactly. if you're going slower than the flow of traffic, that's not merging, that's trying to cut someone off because you like being rear-ended.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by jwslam


+1



exactly. if you're going slower than the flow of traffic, that's not merging, that's trying to cut someone off because you like being rear-ended.

I agree with this. When people let their lane run out, and they are not going the speed of traffic, that means I have to be the one to brake hard. Now, if they at least put on their signal earlier, I can speed up past them, or act accordingly. If they go the speed of traffic, I can also act accordingly. Often that means slowing down just a bit, which is not big deal

Instead, I find it... I dunno... disrespectful if someone uses their merge lane without regard for the fact it's ending. It is their responsibility to merge in. Not mine to ensure they barge their way into a spot.

There are much more annoying practices though - and more dangerous too. Ie: Someone decides to stop dead in the merge lane - even though it doesn't end for half a kilometer. I had that last week going from 16th East onto Deerfoot North - and I had a bit of momentum around the corner. I saw her brake, but I thought that was just temporary to slow down a bit around the corner. Nope... hard stop right in front of me with tons of merge lane to go. Bitch. /rant

[jwslam]

one of the few things i rmb from drivers ed

when trying to merge:
once you turn into the merge lane, look in the mirror and pick a car
chase that car and cut in behind the NO MATTER WHAT
well... not that drastic but you get the point
works like a charm until some bitch in her corolla in front of me brakes trying to cut into deerfoot going 60

[TorqueDog]

I love how many people merge from Deerfoot onto Memorial West, and immediately move over into the left lanes without accelerating up to speed.

[SaturnV]

should be at least 80
and between mcknight and shag should be like 100
anybody else go from like charleswood onto john laurie only to have some fucker yield instead of merge?!!?!
[/B]

Absolutely on the speed, if only that would fix that mess near North Haven and get rid of that turn. But past that it should definitely be higher.

And +2 on the yielders, at least once a week.

You can usually spot them in advance becuase they speed through the playground zone at 60 and then slow down to 40 once they are out of it...

[88jbody]

before changing the speed limit they should make deerfoot 3lanes wide the entire length without the lane endin out of nowhere and becoming an off ramp.

3 lanes one end to the other, or even 4 , then the exit and entrance ramps on the side of that, left lane get a minimum speed limit of 90, and inforce the keep right except to pass logic. also start giving tickets to people who stop in merge lanes and not the people going 10-15km over the speed limit, the 10 over people are not the problem it is the 80 in left lane, not merging properly that are the biggest problem on deer foot

[DayGlow]

Originally posted by bobby_lu


Im sure nothing will happen to them being run over at 60km/h , not to mention the unsafeness of slamming on the brakes to get down to the proper speed.

you need to start looking at least 10 seconds down the road, not the space directly infront of you car.

[Mikko]

Nothing would happen to people getting hit at 60km/h by some SUV/truck/car/semi? Isn't that speed higher than what you'd get falling out the third floor?

I'm not 100% sure, but think that stuff would easily kill someone should the head connect to something, not to mention breaking or severing the legs, possibly break the neck, spine etc.

As for the speed thing: is deerfoot trail by any chance a bigger road inside a city? The speed at which people drive has a large impact on road noise (that wind/tire noise is a killer) and emissions, which are relevant to the inhabitants of the city. So it's not just a matter of what engineers think.

Higher speed means higher difficulty for EVERYONE involved. Higher difficulty means more mistakes. Mistakes means accidents. Accidents means congestion as a lot of the congestion, from what I read, is caused by both minor and major collisions caused by usually risk taking drivers (the fast ones, that are usually seen as 'good' drivers by many of you here).

I think what would do the most is probably a combination of seriously toughening up the demands on getting a drivers license (breeds humbleness and a good attitude) and public campaigns aimed at changing people's attitudes. It also seems the transport infrastructure needs to be expanded as well to handle the increased traffic.

Raising the speed limit is likely to only produce more of the nasty stuff. People's attitudes are affected by the posted limit as well.

[Pollywog]

Originally posted by Mikko
I think what would do the most is probably a combination of seriously toughening up the demands on getting a drivers license (breeds humbleness and a good attitude) and public campaigns aimed at changing people's attitudes.
I couldn't agree with you more. In countries where it is much harder to obtain a driver's license there is a general sense of pride in driving in an organized, safe and efficient manner.


Originally posted by Mikko
Higher speed means higher difficulty for EVERYONE involved. Higher difficulty means more mistakes. Mistakes means accidents. Accidents means congestion as a lot of the congestion, from what I read, is caused by both minor and major collisions caused by usually risk taking drivers (the fast ones, that are usually seen as 'good' drivers by many of you here).


Unfortunatly I agree with this too, especially when a thread to increase Deerfoot's speed is proposed by a guy with the name 2EFNFAST, and the majority support going 120-130 as being much safer than going 100. The stupidity behind the argument of "You morons who drive 100 should be driving 130 like the rest of us" is unfathomable, when it is completely the other way around. Driving the posted limit, that ANYONE can read, including tourists unfamiliar with the Deerfoot500 is much more safe and logical. As you stated, reaction times and space to take evasive action exponentially decreases as speed increases, yielding more accidents.

[jwslam]

Originally posted by Mikko
Higher speed means higher difficulty for EVERYONE involved. Higher difficulty means more mistakes. Mistakes means accidents. Accidents means congestion as a lot of the congestion, from what I read, is caused by both minor and major collisions caused by usually risk taking drivers (the fast ones, that are usually seen as 'good' drivers by many of you here).
driving in itself is a risk
if you're not a risk taker get your ass on public transit
if you're not a risk taker get your ass out of your corolla that you're trying to merge in at 70


Originally posted by Pollywog
Unfortunatly I agree with this too, especially when a thread to increase Deerfoot's speed is proposed by a guy with the name 2EFNFAST, and the majority support going 120-130 as being much safer than going 100. The stupidity behind the argument of "You morons who drive 100 should be driving 130 like the rest of us" is unfathomable, when it is completely the other way around. Driving the posted limit, that ANYONE can read, including tourists unfamiliar with the Deerfoot500 is much more safe and logical. As you stated, reaction times and space to take evasive action exponentially decreases as speed increases, yielding more accidents.

PERSONALLY i never said morons going 100 should be going 120/130
but you're a moron if you're going 100 in the left lane
you're a moron if you're trying to merge at 70

[Mikko]

Originally posted by jwslam

driving in itself is a risk
if you're not a risk taker get your ass on public transit
Agreed, there's risk in everything. But there's differences in levels of risk. Motor vehicle usage on public roads is a social activity filled with interactions, like it or not. We're all responsible for each other's safety. It's not just a matter of personal preference. You nor anyone else has a right to impose their preferred level of risk onto others.

[shin0bi]

^^ Agreed.
I personally HATE being pressured to drive at speeds faster then I am comfortable with.

And with your average person doing 20 - 30km/h FASTER than posted speed limits, that makes merging, or lane changes much more risky.

JWSlam:
Yeah, driving is a risk... but it shouldn't be a bloody GAMBLE. I shouldn't have to take any risks I'm not comfortable with on a public road. INCLUDING the risk of getting a speeding ticket. Insurance is already a bitch for most of us.

Besides, anyone who's been on the C-train downtown knows public transit is risky too. Ever been drooled on by a homeless guy? Its disgusting.